Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
GameCube (Games) Entertainment Games

Nintendo's Boss On Western Partnerships, Online 236

Posted by simoniker from the doomsayers-anonymous dept.
Matt writes "It seems Nintendo President Satoru Iwata has once again spoken out, in a talk to the Japan Economic Foundation, and GameCube Advanced has the highlights. Iwata downplays online gaming, citing the example of a PS2 golf sim which outsold its online counterpart [is this Minna No Golf Online, aka Hot Shots Golf Fore!, versus its prequel?] Also, Iwata speaks about Nintendo working with other non-Japanese companies (saying 'We are now holding negotiations with major Western game developers and will be able to conclude a deal by the end of the year if things go smoothly'), and about takeover speculation regarding Bandai [vague talk of 'a closer relationship'.] In addition, he warned again that the status quo in videogames is in jeopardy... 'We are facing a critical situation, in which the number of game players will decrease unless we change tack', Iwata said."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nintendo's Boss On Western Partnerships, Online More

Nintendo's Boss On Western Partnerships, Online

Comments Filter:

  • nintendo (Score:2, Interesting)

    by sovtekmidget ( 718312 )
    they've always been the loveable underdog-an the also make the ALL the console games with the most amazing story lines.... i can't wait to see what comes of this "closer relationship"

    • Re:nintendo (Score:5, Interesting)

      by The Lynxpro ( 657990 ) <lynxpro@@@gmail...com> on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:31PM (#9596670)
      "they've always been the loveable underdog-an the also make the ALL the console games with the most amazing story lines.... i can't wait to see what comes of this "closer relationship""

      What planet are you from? Nintendo monopolized the game industry in the late 80s like Microsoft can't to this day. It took the combined efforts of Atari Corp. and Atari Games Corp/Tengen through the court system to get Nintendo to drop their licensing agreements that stated that if any 3rd party developer made a title on the NES, it could not be ported to any other competing system. That policy hurt not only the Atari 7800, but the Sega Master System and the NEC TurboGrafx16 (T16). During that era, the Japanese version of the T16 known as the PC Engine, was the dominant system because every title was available on it. NEC brought the system to America only to find out they couldn't release hardly any of the games it enjoyed in Japan to Stateside. The Sega Genesis did not have a large amount of support from 3rd party developers either; Tengen was one of the strongest (and prominent) because they had an axe to grind with "The Other" Beast of Redmond.

      Nintendo's later ineptitude lost the monopoly that they partly built upon their own merits. First with the lack of backwards compatibility (for the NES) in the SNES, and then with the failure to embrace CD-Roms.

      The problem with the game industry is Nintendo is no longer a competent player in it.

      • Re:nintendo (Score:3, Informative)

        by nobodyman ( 90587 )
        Though I agree with you (Nintendo was ruthless company that had *very* heavy-handed tactics), I don't think the 3rd party licensing thing is accurate. The standard 3rd party licensing barred you from making the same title on another console, but I don't think that the licensees were able to get out of this -- the larger 3rd parties were able to negotionate less harsh contracts though.

        Also, the Atari/Tengen lawsuit was over console licensing of Tetris, which Tengen *lost*.

        What I think you're referring

        • Also, the Atari/Tengen lawsuit was over console licensing of Tetris, which Tengen *lost*.

          There were two lawsuits. One was over the use of Elorg's TETRIS trademark, which Tengen lost to Nintendo, the exclusive North American licensee. The other covered the lockout chip and Nintendo's licensing policy, Tengen alleging that Nintendo was abusing a monopoly and Nintendo counter-alleging that Tengen stole the source code to the lockout chip by defrauding the Copyright Office. Both claims eventually proved tru

        • At my university, (and most others probably), the school had an agreement with pepsi, to sell only pepsi products in all of their cafeteria/restaurants. And the corrollary to that was that they couldn't offer coke products. Occasionally a student group would do a fund raiser by selling cokes, but the school overlooked that. A few years into my education, the school signed a new contract, and we became a Coca-cola campus, so all of the vending machines and fountains were switched out, and you couldn't find a
      • It wasn't ineptitude, it was arrogance. The SNES did great for a while (although I've heard the Genesis out sold it over all, but then again it had a head start and got cheaper, faster). Nintendo started lossing it when the N64 hit. The cartridges where expensive as hell, and Nintendo made developers give them their program code so they could manufacture the cartridges, and then sold the cartridges to the developer. Meaning Nintendo made out like a bandit whether the game sold or not, and meaning that profi

      • First with the lack of backwards compatibility (for the NES) in the SNES

        Eighty-five percent of Super NES buyers in the first year or so already had an NES. Would the extra $50 (remember, 1991 dollars, 1991 recession) have justified an NES-compatibility coprocessor? How many Power Base Converters (adapters to let the Sega Genesis read Sega Master System carts using the Genesis's built-in SMS-compatibility hardware) did Sega actually sell?

        And yes, the Super NES was back-compatible with Game Boy titles.

      • Re:nintendo (Score:4, Informative)

        by badasscat ( 563442 ) <basscadet75NO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Friday July 02, 2004 @11:57PM (#9597964)
        What planet are you from? Nintendo monopolized the game industry in the late 80s like Microsoft can't to this day. It took the combined efforts of Atari Corp. and Atari Games Corp/Tengen through the court system to get Nintendo to drop their licensing agreements that stated that if any 3rd party developer made a title on the NES, it could not be ported to any other competing system.

        You don't quite have your facts straight on this. Nintendo had exclusivity deals with various third parties just as they (and Sony, and MS) do now. That has not, nor will it ever, change. What Atari sued Nintendo over was their "seal of quality" program, in which Nintendo would not legally allow third parties to develop software for their system without their permission. Atari basically did not want to pay Nintendo's licensing fees and thought this amounted to a monopolistic business practice. The reason for the program from Nintendo's view was obvious, though: it was a direct response to the American game crash of 1984, which was partly caused by a glut of unlicensed, poor quality games on the market. In fact, Atari lost that lawsuit, and Nintendo won the lawsuit they later filed against Tengen. Otherwise the entire video game industry would not exist as it does today - there would be no reason for any company to make game hardware.

        Whether or not you agree with the policy, Atari is hardly the good guy you're making them out to be. Remember that it was Atari who first sued Activision for developing games for the 2600 - Atari didn't think third parties even had a right to exist, licensed or not. By the time of the NES, Atari was on the ropes and out of desperation formed Tengen so they could play both sides of the fence - develop for their own systems under the Atari name and for competitors as Tengen.

        Remember also that Tengen illegally released their own version of Tetris for the NES, which was subsequently pulled from the market and damages awarded to Nintendo, who owned the copyright for home console systems.

        That policy hurt not only the Atari 7800, but the Sega Master System and the NEC TurboGrafx16 (T16). During that era, the Japanese version of the T16 known as the PC Engine, was the dominant system because every title was available on it. NEC brought the system to America only to find out they couldn't release hardly any of the games it enjoyed in Japan to Stateside. The Sega Genesis did not have a large amount of support from 3rd party developers either; Tengen was one of the strongest (and prominent) because they had an axe to grind with "The Other" Beast of Redmond.

        This is completely, completely wrong. First of all, the PC Engine was never the "dominant system". It was more popular than it was here, but it was always second to the Famicom/Super Famicom. Second, NEC's problems in this country were of their own making, not Nintendo's - there was nothing preventing them from releasing many of their most popular games here, they just chose not to. Same goes for Sega. It's true that many of the third party games released in Japan were never released here, but that's true now of the PS2 and GameCube as well - we're just not that big into dating sims, hentai games and other genres that are all the rage over there. It's got nothing to do with licensing. And it sure doesn't explain why NEC and Sega didn't bring some of their own most popular first party titles over here - it was simply ineptitude on the parts of these manufacturers.

        And lastly, Tengen was never as big as you seem to think they were, and they were only in business for a short time before their legal issues shut them down (the licensing issue went back and forth in the courts for a while before Nintendo prevailed). Some of their games were quality games but they were always a second-tier publisher, similar to a company like THQ today (which Sega uses to release a lot of their games on other systems, similar to how Atari used Tengen).

        I'm not saying N

  • Why online is not the next holy grail. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Samir Gupta ( 623651 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:11PM (#9596562) Homepage
    I've heard Iwata-san pontificate on this multiple times. He believes MS and (to a lesser extent) Sony have staked too much on online games without thinking through the costs for consumers. To be honest, I agree... for most games in other genres, other than some clearly community-centric and dynamic examples, such as MMORPGS and virtual communities like Second Life, it's not reasonable for users to pay $50 or so for a game, and then pay a monthly fee to play.

    The gaming industry needs to make money. But nickel and diming players, especially the younger set that consitutes the bread and butter still, may cause a backlash and revolt like what is happening now in music, and movies.

    • Re:Why online is not the next holy grail. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by j1m+5n0w ( 749199 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:24PM (#9596638) Homepage Journal
      I've heard Iwata-san pontificate on this multiple times. He believes MS and (to a lesser extent) Sony have staked too much on online games without thinking through the costs for consumers. To be honest, I agree... for most games in other genres, other than some clearly community-centric and dynamic examples, such as MMORPGS and virtual communities like Second Life, it's not reasonable for users to pay $50 or so for a game, and then pay a monthly fee to play.

      I mostly agree, but just because the business model is lousy doesn't mean that Nintendo should shun online games altogether. They could instead come up with a better business plan (like free or very cheap online access, or open source game servers)

      -jim

      • Re:Why online is not the next holy grail. (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        but just because the business model is lousy doesn't mean that Nintendo should shun online games altogether. They could instead come up with a better business plan

        Lets see, Xbox Live is currently $50/yr. Thats $4.16 per month. Less than 1 dime and 1 nickel per day to play as much as you want, as long as you want, with whomever you want.
    • Not reasonable to pay for on online service to play online games? It is a service like any other service and services cost money to run, and for many services, you pay to get that service.

      For example, XBOX Live isn't sitting on a couple of PC's in somebodies basement, it is a world wide gaming service connecting approximately 1 million gamers together. That doesn't cost nothing, it takes money to run it and Microsoft asks a fee to use it, which I think is entirely reasonable.

      As for monthly payments to p

      • For example, XBOX Live isn't sitting on a couple of PC's in somebodies basement, it is a world wide gaming service connecting approximately 1 million gamers together. That doesn't cost nothing, it takes money to run it and Microsoft asks a fee to use it, which I think is entirely reasonable.

        Yep, and given a million gamers a fee of a dollar per gamer per month would be way more than reasonable. Dominant, particularly monopoly, companies like M$ love to pretend that they do not have massive economies scal

  • Golf? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mfh ( 56 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:14PM (#9596575) Homepage Journal
    I saw a recent Slashdot poll [slashdot.org] that showed that most people here either like FPS or RPG games. I guess changing tack would mean more of these, if Nintendo wants to really crack the market better. I would like to see some better RPG games, myself.

    • Re:Golf? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by bmw ( 115903 )
      I saw a recent Slashdot poll that showed that most people here either like FPS or RPG games. I guess changing tack would mean more of these, if Nintendo wants to really crack the market better. I would like to see some better RPG games, myself.

      Me too. How about an RPG FPS? :-)

      I'm hoping that more and more types of games start incorporating RPG elements... I like good, real-time action but I also want character development and a good storyline.
      • Deus Ex is actually pretty close to an RPG FPS... Actually, I think that games in general are starting to move in an RPGish direction; even run-of-the-mill action games these days are backed up by decent stories. Games have gotten more complex gameplay and control wise and they've been doing the same in terms of story.
    • " I saw a recent Slashdot poll that showed that most people here"

      I don't even need to use the entire quote to make my point....Slashdot is not a large market for them. The vast majority of gamers have different tastes than what some Slashdot poll shows.

      I don't mean this as an attack or anything...I just think people on here sometimes forget that what works for them doesn't necessarily work for everybody else, and things wouldn't necessarily be better if companies followed Slashdot trends.

  • Nintendo (Score:2, Interesting)

    by elasticwings ( 758452 )
    I really hope that their next system does well. I have a Gamecube, and I really like alot of the different interesting games they come up with. Animal Planet and Pikmin were both really fun.

  • target audience = everyone (Score:4, Insightful)

    by j1m+5n0w ( 749199 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:16PM (#9596582) Homepage Journal
    Iwata also said games should not be targeted exclusively at children or adults. "Game software should neither be exclusively targeted at children nor adults," said Iwata. "Instead, we will develop software which anyone can instantly understand. At the same time, production of software readily acceptable to adults is worth studying."

    Yay, someone understands! Down with the objectionably cartoony link with the ellipsoid head! (And no, I don't mind cartoon-style rendering if its done right.)

    -jim

    • "Yay, someone understands! Down with the objectionably cartoony link with the ellipsoid head! (And no, I don't mind cartoon-style rendering if its done right.)"

      So Family Guy is cool around here, but Zelda is objectionable.
    • I really prefer Nintendo-ish graphics to xbox and ps2. I see this comparison like the comparison between unreal and other online first person shooters. We can't make it look perfectly real, so let's not try. Let's make it fun, pleasing and bright. The player won't expect things to look any certain way so anyplace we fall shy of our goal won't look bad.

      In another ten years, yes games will be breathtaking. I'm waiting for real time rendered faces that don't suck, and I'm sure the software is sitting
  • That article is a little thin on actual information. I think we get a better inside line on Nintendo's operations from Samir Gupta, who should be posting in this thread at any minute.

  • Decline of the Gamer? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by maggeth ( 793549 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:20PM (#9596605)
    'We are facing a critical situation, in which the number of game players will decrease unless we change tack', Iwata said.

    Hmmmm.. I can understand that the variety of games will decrease over time unless there is some kind of major structural breakthrough, but I don't really see the number of gamers going down IMHO. At some point there will be a huge business interest in pushing the boundaries which will lead to more investment. Hell, there are still addicts to this day playing Doom and all kinds of classics.

    Even though in the future there may be fewer original games to choose from, I will still have no life and will still be playing games.

    • is that you, probably qualifying as a "hardcore" gamer, are not the concern. The concern is the casual gamer, the people who won't just keep playing video games no matter now bad they get, the people who wno't go to the bother of tracking down abandonware games from eras where the games were actually fun.

      These people are a rather huge segment and if video games do not do a good job as presenting themselves as something interesting, creative, rewarding, and worth the money, these people may well go spend th
    • Hey, agree or disagree, a perceived "decline of the gamer" can only be a good thing for gamers. If it encourages innovation, I'd rather them think I'm one foot from the door.

      It's nice to have companies fighting for your business instead of feeling entitled to it...

  • Online comparison? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Spaceman40 ( 565797 ) <blinks@a[ ]org ['cm.' in gap]> on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:22PM (#9596619) Homepage Journal
    Iwata also downplayed online, using the example of a PS2 online golf simulation game that did not sell as well as an offline golf simulation game. Iwata says this is "proof that customers do not want online games," and that "most customers do not wish to pay the extra money for connection to the Internet, and for some customers, connection procedures to the Internet are still not easy."

    Now, I can understand looking at this and saying - "online isn't the be-all end-all of technologies for consoles", but honestly, an online golf game - most likely the least online-needing sports subgenre there is - used as proof that online isn't a capability people want? What about all the people playing SOCOM on PS2? Splinter Cell on XBox?

    Also, I don't see why Nintendo would want to cripple its next console system with lack of good network/Internet features like it did to the GameCube (come on, I love Nintendo, but that was dumb), especially if it will only be seen as lagging by consumers. Also, the not-a-Game-Boy DS will have wireless connectivity, so it's not as if they're abandoning the Internet altogether...

    In summary: proof? yeah right.
    • "Now, I can understand looking at this and saying - "online isn't the be-all end-all of technologies for consoles", but honestly, an online golf game - most likely the least online-needing sports subgenre there is - used as proof that online isn't a capability people want? What about all the people playing SOCOM on PS2? Splinter Cell on XBox?"

      I think his point wasn't that it was 'mass-market' enough. I think Nintendo has a point. Few gamers have demonstrated that the current internet-console-multiplayer
    • I believe that the adoption figures for XBox Live are something like five to ten percent of all XBox users at the absolute most optimistic. And that's probably about as good as a console online system could possibly get, something that the XBox developer community has poured a huge amount of effort into.

      Online is certainly a feature some people want in a console, but that may not necessarily mean that it's the best thing to put effort into at this exact point in time...

      That said, the Nintendo DS does inde
    • I agree with the basic "this isn't proof" argument. But the reality is that there isn't nearly as many people playing online console games as you might think. Microsoft infamously inflated their Xbox live subsriber numbers by adding in gamers who signed up for the free Xbox live that was included with some new games. The PS2 online play also isn't doing quite as well as one might imagine. While at populat gamestores like EBgames or Gamestop that have a very hardcore and bleeding edge customer base, online g
    • an online golf game - most likely the least online-needing sports subgenre there is

      Nintendo, as always, thinks of Japan first. Minna no Golf was HUGE in Japan (and still is). I know families (i.e., mothers and fathers) who bought copies it was so big.
    • "Also, the not-a-Game-Boy DS will have wireless connectivity, so it's not as if they're abandoning the Internet altogether..."

      I don't get that. Every time I read something about the DS, they're talking about its wi-fi capability and how people want to be able to link up their DSs to play and communicate with the people around them. Somehow though, that doesn't apply to their console.

      Personally, I enjoy my single player games but there are definitely some that I think could benefit from online multi-
      • I don't get that. Every time I read something about the DS, they're talking about its wi-fi capability and how people want to be able to link up their DSs to play and communicate with the people around them. Somehow though, that doesn't apply to their console.

        It's short-range communication. Think of it as the wireless version of the Gameboy link cable. And Nintendo already has this in the Gamecube: just attach a few more controllers to the box. You get no monthly fees, don't have to hook up to a LAN and c

        • I think you need to go read up on the DS. Straight from Nintendo [nintendo.com], it says "And wireless functions could link players in the same room - or across the country."

          It's not just about inviting some friends over to your house and playing together in the same room. Whether or not someone will build the infrastructure for that remains to be seen but it does seem to be something that Nintendo is at least considering.

          Now to debunk your argument about the GC:
          • I live in the US (midwest). One of my best friends
    • What about all the people playing SOCOM on PS2? Splinter Cell on XBox?

      Well about SOCOM, theres no comparison with it on the PS2 (either their far better, far worse, or developed and geared totally differently.) But Splinter Cell would be a more interesting comparison, assuming you could convince Microsoft to release the number of Xbox Live Splinter Cell : Pandora Tomorrow players (the first game flat out had no multiplayer, the second did, perfect for this type of argument.)

      The very fact that there are few

    • Now, I can understand looking at this and saying - "online isn't the be-all end-all of technologies for consoles", but honestly, an online golf game - most likely the least online-needing sports subgenre there is - used as proof that online isn't a capability people want?

      Now I agree with you that golf isn't necessarily the best example of a game that needs to be on-line. Of course it doesn't.

      However in bars here in North America the Golden Tee arcade machines always seem to be busy. Those things are on

  • Innovation (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MysteriousMystery ( 708469 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:23PM (#9596629)
    The one thing that makes Nintendo stand out above other companies is innovation, as long as their company continues to find new ways to entertain, as Nintendo often does their products will continue to have their place in the market. As much as people initially criticized it the Nintendo Dual Screen looks great and the touch screen features seem like the step in the right direction towards changing the way we play games. As time goes on the number of new genre's and innovations throughout the industry continues to deteroriate. And it's good to see that Nintendo is continuing with their ideas of new ideas in the industry. Having worked on the media side of the gaming industry for many years and only recently retiring from it due to a lack of interest in games (and the lack of significant income from doing so), I strongly agree that the generation of 20s and 30s gamers that have made the industry grow strong is becoming less and less interested in video games and only by creating new and innovative games, rather than cookie cutter rip-offs and sequels can the video game industry continue to thrive.
    • Why don't they innovate new gameplay styles in online multiplayer games then?

      It seems like a blank canvas to me. Sure the PC has its FPS and MMORPGs but compared to Nintendos catalogue of genres it produces and innovates within regularly they look very specialised.

  • Western developers (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mcc ( 14761 ) <amcclure@purdue.edu> on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:24PM (#9596632) Homepage
    I find this part interesting. The one area in which Microsoft has been REALLY successful with the XBox is in winning the hearts and minds of western developers. I've found it worrying that Sony and Nintendo might not realize this is happening because they're concentrating on Japanese customers and developers and the XBox is bombing horribly in Japan. I'd be glad to see if Nintendo made actual moves to woo U.S. developers, it would be very easy to just neglect U.S. developers in the console market but this is certainly a foolish thing to do in the long run...

    Of course then my question becomes, WHAT IS SILICON KNIGHTS UP TO?
    • would be very easy to just neglect U.S. developers in the console market but this is certainly a foolish thing to do in the long run...

      Not when it costs $20,000 a week just to get them to answer the phone.
    • Of course then my question becomes, WHAT IS SILICON KNIGHTS UP TO?

      Not much of anything, actually. They're still working on GEIST and Too Human, but otherwise, their partnership with Nintendo came to a close [ign.com] earlier this year.
      • Silicon Knights is not connected with Geist, Geist is being done by N-space [n-space.com]. Too Human has been little more than a rumor for years.

        In any case the question I am wondering is this: Once they were done with Twin Snakes, what did they start on next? They're no longer exclusive to Nintendo but that doesn't mean they're dumping the gamecube either.
    • I'd be glad to see if Nintendo made actual moves to woo U.S. developers

      Western = US? It could also be Europe, Canada, etc.

  • Horse and buggy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by strobexii ( 601986 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:24PM (#9596639)
    As long as Nintendo wants to make games for a younger audience, offline games should be okay. Kids can amuse themselves with

    For the gamer who enjoys true competition and high replay value, however, there is no substitute for the online experience. Starcraft, Counterstrike, Doom III, etc., are examples of this. Other types of online games, such as MMORPGs, allow for a dynamic and social feel that no offline game can authentically replicate.

    On the other hand, a well-made online game tends to have a huge replay lifespan. Perhaps that is why Nintendo is hestitant to embrace them?
    • I don't know, games like Animal Crossing and Super Smash Brothers Melee are very popular as communal/social games, without online play. AC manages to let you share your village with others without online mutliplayer. Instead, you can share codes to trade items, and others can plug their character into your town to 'visit'. SSBM, as with most fighting games, is just multiplayer competetive goodness. I'm sure those games would have been more fun to play if they had the online option, but they faired quite

    • Re:Horse and buggy (Score:4, Insightful)

      by pavon ( 30274 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @07:06PM (#9596869)
      You nailed two the important catagories of gameplay - solitary and massively multiplayer, but you missed an important third catagory - social "party" games.

      These are games that you can get together with a few friends and have a good time. Games like smash brothers, mario party, wario ware, tennis/golf games, pokeman puzzle. These are games that you can pick up and begin playing immediately, and there is really no such thing as beating the game, just beating your friends. And it doesn't matter if you are 8 or 35 they are still fun. These are the types of games that is talking about and they are the types of games that nintendo excells at.

      The truth of the matter is that any game that requires a large investment of ones time and attention to be fun will never appeal to more than a small audience - the kids and hardcore gamers. With the cost of producing games constantly rising, nintendo doesn't want to cater(sp?) to the hardcore with their constantly increasing demands and low numbers. They want to make games that are just fun. They don't want to be the next Wizards of the Coast - they want to be the next Milton Bradley.
    • On the other hand, a well-made online game tends to have a huge replay lifespan. Perhaps that is why Nintendo is hestitant to embrace them?

      If the online players only account for a tiny fraction of gaming, why put so much development effort into it? If you make an on-line only game, you are limited to the number of subscribers.

      I sure as heck don't want to pay a monthly subscription, although the games can be less predictable than the standard AI and give a better gameplay provided you don't get the type
    • Starcraft, Counterstrike, Doom III, etc. are PC games. Your comparison doesn't make sense.
      Yes, I konw... these games have been (or will be) ported to consoles, but how many gamers play the XBox version of CS compared to the PC version.

      I doubt the XBox online market is near as big as the PC online market.

  • Offline vs Online Multiplayer (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 02, 2004 @06:39PM (#9596717)
    I can say from experience nearly every offline gaming experience I've had is many times better than online ones. The best multiplayer experiences I've had are with games like Mario Kart, GoldenEye, Smash Bros., Bomberman, Hot Shots Golf (minna no golufu), Culdcept, traditional fighting games (i.e. Soul Calibur), and cooperative shooters (i.e. Radiant Silvergun).

    I'm not just drawing experience from console games either. Counter Strike in a LAN setting is tons better than counterstrike online. Rainbow Six (and its sequels) cooperative multiplayer is totally unplayable online compared to on a LAN. RTS games like WarCraft II, StarCraft, WarCraft III, Age of Empires, Empire Earth, Command & Conquer, Total Annihilation, etc have consistently been better in a LAN setting than online. Some of my favorite computer multiplayer experiences were hotseat games like Heroes of Might and Magic or Worms (or Scorched Earth and other derivatives).

    I was reminded of the sharp difference between these two experiences after playing a lot of card and board games recently. After the semester ended I jumped on Yahoo! games to get a quick fix and was totally turned off by the cold atmosphere and lack of presence. I have also dumped hundreds of hours into Everquest, Asheron's Call, Dark Age of Camelot, Lineage 2 (beta) and City of Heroes to meet up with the promise of meeting up with my friends only to be turned back by countless gameplay and communications barriers so that for that rare occasion I would meet up and be able to play with someone I knew I was usually having more fun with the person hanging out at my house watching me play than with the person I was actually playing with.

    It's just not the same without real people, face to face jumping up and yelling across the room at each other. Sorry, online is a subpar experience in my book. Online gameplay for console games totally uninterests me for any reason. Online gameplay for PC games is only necessary for a LAN. I've tried a large number of games over the years and am fairly conclusive in my position.

  • Unfortunately, this is nothing new from Iwata (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jayde Stargunner ( 207280 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @07:18PM (#9596919)
    Sadly, Iwata has maintained variations of the, "We are facing a critical situation, in which the number of game players will decrease unless we change tack," line for quite some time--and often applies it to the game market as a whole. Unfortunately, it's less of a factual statement on the condition of the gaming market, and more of an excuse for the fact that many of Nintendo's recent tactics for regaining console market share have failed.

    Really, though, the gaming market is quite strong and will likely continue to be quite strong for quite some time... The PS2 has enjoyed very good times, and thus Iwata--if he stays to form--will probably predict the "demise" of the industry every single year that Sony beats Nintendo's console sales into the ground.

    Some of the bullet points in that article are just laughable as little more than sour grape, such as, "Iwata downplayed the PlayStation as a 'home electronic appliance,' and not a 'game machine.'" Really, the PS and PS2 are 99% focused on games, so calling them anything other than a "game machine" is rather silly. While I could see that claim being possibly applied to the Xbox, trying to launch it against the PlayStation--which has a simply massive game library--just seems petty.

    As for the online games, Nintendo has been continuously out of touch with the online market for quite some time... If he wants to take a good look at online games and their appeal, he should note that Xbox Live! is one of the main reasons the Xbox is managing to roughly keep up with the Gamecube in console sales, or the fact that Square Enix's Final Fantasy XI has been an absolute cash cow for them.

    Anyway, not that it's a travesty (pretty normal, actually,) but Iwata is running a business more than actually having deep insight into the future of the industry. His statements seem to be directed in an attempt to lower confidence in Sony and Microsoft--and little else.

    -Jayde

  • meh (Score:4, Interesting)

    by spacerodent ( 790183 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @07:56PM (#9597087)
    as long as nintendo continues to market mostly to the kiddy sector I can't seem to convince myself to buy any of their products. For all the games they make a year I can only manage to enjoy a handful, while at the same time other systems like the PS2 and XBOX make a wide range of games where I have more of a choice as to "childish" or "adult". When it comes down to dollars I'd rather spend them on the system I can enjoy more.
    • Meh to you too.

      As long as Nintendo keeps making some of the most gameplay-packed and flat-out fun games, I can't convince myself not to like their products.

      They really are the kings of gameplay. And so what if the games have a "slight" cutesy twist to them? Does it somehow make you less manly if you play them? Will your testes shrivel up and leave you with a castrato voice?

      No, and why the hell would they? The only people who put down the GC based on the "kiddy" look of the games are 14 year old whiny boy

  • My Two Cents (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ThomasJS ( 598250 )
    I love Nintendo to death but I feel that they are heading the way of Sega if they don't change there ways. Online play does matter it may not be the holy grail of gaming that some people make it out to be but you cant ignore it or you will pay in the end. And as an XBox owner I can tell you that online play can make an good game into a great game. And for all you people out there still saying that the only good game on the XBox is Halo need to get out a little more.

  • It's all about point-of-view, like Obi-Wan said (Score:4, Insightful)

    by TaintedPastry ( 790856 ) on Friday July 02, 2004 @11:32PM (#9597858)
    Online Play is a blessing and a curse for all Gamers, everywhere.

    It allows Splinter Cell:PT to be infinitely amusing. It allows four gamers to form a sponsored CounterStrike team and WORK playing CS. It gives WarCraft III more playability. Yadda yadda yadda...it's great.

    HOWEVER...

    ...as more and more games become more and more based around online play, the overwhelmingly large amounts of players that don't have any internet access at all are left out.

    I think that in order to get more people playing in Online communities, game makers are leaving behind those without LOADS of cash to tack onto a monthly bill along with Rent, Food and Phone.

    I'm glad Nintendo hasn't forgotten those who don't have DSL.

  • We are here again speaking of multiplayers like we were speaking of Internet 8 years ago. "Internet is COMING; big guys pay attention! ADAPT NOW OR DIE!" The fact is 8 years later, Internet is truly becoming mainstream and guess what, big guys are still standing and strong over the dead bodies of counteless early adaptors of Internet, a.k.a the dot.com era stars.

    What's the problem with Internet dot.com? Putting everything on Internet without much real innovation that benefit the end customers.

    Today, onlin

  • -to describe gaming.

    I know this is a matter of perspective, but still. . .

    A reactor melt-down is 'critical'. Massive head-wound trauma? Critical. Making ten percent fewer billions of yen a year selling Mario Brothers game cartridges. . ?

    They're digital plumbers, for goodness sake! It's not a product; it's flashing lights on a screen! A hallucinogenic daydream! It's a complete freak of nature that a thin dime was ever made in the first place!

    Several lucky stars should be counted and thanked that an
  • Too many negative comments about the statements made, and while I can see the point behind some of them, I'm at least backing up Iwata's comments on a philisophical level.

    The console industry is in a sad state, and the GameCube and GBA are the only "consoles" I currently am enjoying because Nintendo puts fun games onto them. I'll even take a port of the original Zelda over "GTA: Kill hookers in LA rather than Miami" or whatever they're calling the next GTA game.

Slashdot Top Deals

Solutions are obvious if one only has the optical power to observe them over the horizon. -- K.A. Arsdall

Close